Where do you rank Ray Bourque all time?

[Canadiens1958]

Some do. The vast majority only follow either (1) the NHL generally, or (2) their NHL team specifically.

Interesting diachotomy. So it is possible to follow a specific team without know how the rest of the league is doing, how your team is positioned in the standings,the quality of the opposition, etc?

 

[MXD]

because Potvin, Coffey, Chelios...all 3 of which are better than any of the above listed. Then you can add in Leetch and Langway

And Mark Howe. And Scott Stevens. And Larry Robinson (...disingenuous, I know) while we're at it.

 

[86Habs]

I'd personally rank Bourque 12th - 14th all-time. You have the Big 4, two goaltenders (Roy, Hasek), Harvey, and four forwards (Beliveau, Hull, Jagr, Crosby). Richard and Plante are somewhere in that mix as well. So, 12th - 14th feels about right to me.

 

[quoipourquoi]

I'm content to die alone on the hill that Mark Messier was a marginally better player than Ray Bourque and perceived as such throughout their careers.

 

[Staniowski]

I'm content to die alone on the hill that Mark Messier was a marginally better player than Ray Bourque and perceived as such throughout their careers.

You're not alone. I certainly would rank Messier over Bourque. Do the vast majority really rank Bourque over Messier?

I think if you look at both of them at their best (which is probably around the same time), you have to take Messier. Messier at his best was incredibly good.

Bourque was one of my favourite players, though. I would cheer for Bourque over Messier.

 

[quoipourquoi]

You're not alone. I certainly would rank Messier over Bourque. Do the vast majority really rank Bourque over Messier?

On HFBoards, yes. It's one of those things almost specific to us that doesn't align with common perception. I don't know that I've seen a media list with Bourque over Messier - though the two are usually very closely ranked.

 

[Sentinel]

It's projection. Russians are biases towards Russian players and assume Canadians are just as biased.

Truthfully we all have those ethnic and nationalistic biases, but the Canadians seem best at getting around it.

Don Cherry must be a figment of my imagination. And if he isn't, he must be speaking for himself only, and not for a large chunk of the population. Canadians never chanted "this is our game" in 1972. And so on, and so forth.

 

[jj cale]

I'm content to die alone on the hill that Mark Messier was a marginally better player than Ray Bourque and perceived as such throughout their careers.

You'll never be alone, I have Messier over Bourque too.

Messier, incredibly underrated on HF boards, one of the best players of all time.

 

[jj cale]

Don Cherry must be a figment of my imagination. And if he isn't, he must be speaking for himself only, and not for a large chunk of the population. Canadians never chanted "this is our game" in 1972. And so on, and so forth.

From what I have heard, the Russian media has like hundreds of Russian Don cherrys, their fans on here come off like that a lot of the times too.

I honestly cannot think of a more biased group of fans towards their players then Russian fans around here, I suppose the Finnish posters give them a run for their money.

There is a Canadian poster on this site who is fluent in Russian and he sometimes gives us the lowdown on what the /russian media writes about concerning Canadian/Russian hockey and it's just insane, the stuff they say are things that would make Don Cherry blush, he does not even come close to the stuff these guys spew.

I don't think the Canadian media or fans are even in their class concerning that stuff.

 

[Staniowski]

Don Cherry must be a figment of my imagination. And if he isn't, he must be speaking for himself only, and not for a large chunk of the population. Canadians never chanted "this is our game" in 1972. And so on, and so forth.

Don't mind Don Cherry. Half of Canada loves him, the other half either tolerates him or very much dislikes him. Markus Naslund once said he thought Cherry was just a cartoon character.

 

[Sentinel]

From what I have heard, the Russian media has like hundreds of Russian Don cherrys, their fans on here come off like that a lot of the times too.

I honestly cannot think of a more biased group of fans towards their players then Russian fans around here, I suppose the Finnish posters give them a run for their money.

I don't think the Canadian media or fans are even in their class concerning that stuff.

I can attest to that as well. But just because Europeans (Russians in particular) are prone to extreme nationalism, doesn't mean Canadians are immune to it. You are currently engaging in the textbook practice of "whataboutism."

I am pretty sure that a list of the greatest hockey players of all time taken in Europe would look drastically different from HF because most of the people here are, after all, Canadian. Simply because they value different things. For example, there is no way a five time MVP winner Tretiak would not be in the Top 3 of goalies of all time, etc.

 

[jj cale]

I can attest to that as well. But just because Europeans (Russians in particular) are prone to extreme nationalism, doesn't mean Canadians are immune to it. You are currently engaging in the textbook practice of "whataboutism."

I am pretty sure that a list of the greatest hockey players of all time taken in Europe would look drastically different from HF because most of the people here are, after all, Canadian. Simply because they value different things. For example, there is no way a five time MVP winner Tretiak would not be in the Top 3 of goalies of all time, etc.

I never said Canadians were immune to it, we are obviously not, no one is.

 

[Staniowski]

I can attest to that as well. But just because Europeans (Russians in particular) are prone to extreme nationalism, doesn't mean Canadians are immune to it. You are currently engaging in the textbook practice of "whataboutism."

I am pretty sure that a list of the greatest hockey players of all time taken in Europe would look drastically different from HF because most of the people here are, after all, Canadian. Simply because they value different things. For example, there is no way a five time MVP winner Tretiak would not be in the Top 3 of goalies of all time, etc.

Yeah, I agree with your general point.

Look at the Canada Cup '87 - Canada vs Soviets:

5 of the Canadian players are in the top 100 on HF.
4 of the players cut from the Canadian team are in the top 100 on HF.
1 of the players who declined an invitation is in the top 100 on HF.

Compared to only 2 of the Russians - both of whom are ranked much lower than they should be, in my opinion.

The same teams' HHOF members:

12 of the Canadian players are in the HHOF.
Compared to only 3 of the Russians, after Makarov was finally named after many, many years of being ignored.

All of this even though many people thought the Soviets were the better team overall.

 

[86Habs]

I'm content to die alone on the hill that Mark Messier was a marginally better player than Ray Bourque and perceived as such throughout their careers.

You're probably right. Thinking back on it Messier was likely regarded as a nominally "better" player than Bourque during their respective primes (by "better", I mean more impactful, not necessarily more talented). When looking at my all time top 12/15, it seemed strange and somewhat unbalanced to only have three defencemen (Orr, Harvey, Bourque). To remove Bourque from the top 12 and replace him with Messier/Richard would make it seem even more unbalanced. Part of the difficulty of ranking all positions together, I guess. Regardless, I voted for Bourque being in the Top 15, and I'm sticking to it!

 

[MXD]

TBH, Bourque Top-10...? I can't see it. Actually, the only way I could see it would be one of Roy or Hasek out of the Top-10 in this case (unless you're going with them being 10-11), or Maurice Richard out of the Top-10 completely.

Whichever case, I'm not really bothering anymore with your argument at this point.

 

[BenchBrawl]

I'm content to die alone on the hill that Mark Messier was a marginally better player than Ray Bourque and perceived as such throughout their careers.

You're not alone.I think I rank Messier ahead of Bourque too.

 

[Canadiens1958]

You're not alone.I think I rank Messier ahead of Bourque too.

This is going to be the next major debate. The value of top defencemen vs the value of top forwards especially when TOI gets factored in.

 

[BenchBrawl]

This is going to be the next major debate. The value of top defencemen vs the value of top forwards especially when TOI gets factored in.

The danger of going too far in overvaluing defensemen due to superior TOI is that it will become almost impossible for a forward to be ranked ahead of a top defenseman.Interesting debate for sure.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

This is going to be the next major debate. The value of top defencemen vs the value of top forwards especially when TOI gets factored in.

personally, I see Messier as overrated. People always point to the Cups and leadership, but nearly all of that occurred with one of the most stacked teams of all time. Its real easy to rack up team accomplishments playing with Gretzky, Kurri, Coffey, Fuhr.

he has 0x Ross, 0x Rocket

Yes, Messier scored more 1,887 vs 1,579. But that gap is not large enough when you account for the value of Bourque defensively. He scored 1,500 while being the 1-2 best defensive player in the NHL (he was top 5 in Norris voting for 17 consecutive seasons, winning 5x). I'd rather have 30min a night of Bourque than 23-25 min a night of Messier

The biggest reason I can't put Messier above Bourque is post season all stars:

1st team:

Bourque: 13
Messier: 4

2nd team:

Bourque: 6
Messier: 1

 

[BenchBrawl]

Honestly, I don't find it outrageous if someone ranks Denis Potvin ahead of Raymond Bourque.

 

[Killion]

Don't mind Don Cherry. Half of Canada loves him, the other half either tolerates him or very much dislikes him. Markus Naslund once said he thought Cherry was just a cartoon character.

Pretty much this. He's a throwback. Two tone red & white 2 door 57 Plymouth Fury with fins out ta here. Small town boy who left home early & had to grow up fast. Lived, played, earned a living & raised a family in a lot of other small towns until Boston came a calling. Thing is, you can take the boy or the man out of the small town but you cant take that small town out of the individual, not at the age he finally hit the big bright city lights. He's a creature of his environment, time & place. Born in 1934, Kingston Ontario... born into the Great Depression, WW2, living in small town USA through the many years of the Cold War. Forged early in Kingston, an Edwardian, Monarchist, Militarist, Conservative outlook & perspective on life. You have to give him credit for changing his attitudes, opinions towards everything from french Canadian & European along with Russian players over the years. This is not a guy like so many others of his generation from similar backgrounds who one might consider "worldly". Salt of the earth type & of the type you'll find in small towns in every country.

You really have to give former HNIC Executive Producer Ralph Mellanby credit for taking a chance on Cherry in hiring him, had to have known that his opinions, his "sermons" would be absolutely anathema to the beyond left leaning socialist Apparatchiks at Mother Corp; the CBC. And neither he nor the audience were disappointed. Weekly, Don outraging some group or individual, Canadas' version of Archie Bunker in some respects, and it absolutely made for great TV. Ratings for his Coaches Corner going through the roof, millions tuning in to watch that & that alone, changing the channel, going back to watch their movie or whatever. The broadcasts in English Canada all Leaf-Centric, they absolutely sucked through the 80's, dysfunctional bit for a couple of blips in the early 90's & 00's, Cherrys Coaches' Corner providing for some dark, sardonic humor at times. Small town Greaser stuffed into a clown suit (and I mean that in a nice way, respectfully) railing against not just the state of the game, organizations, GM's & Coaches, the League, players and well beyond. Flooded with complaints, the Mandarins at CBC apoplectic, demanding his head on a platter....

Now, tell me thats not amusing? You didnt have to & most didnt agree with his opinions about French Canadians & Visors, about Swedes, Finns, Russians... and sure he crossed the line, thats what made it so successful, amusing, he had absolutely no clue, completely unaware in terms of PC Speak & did not care, unashamedly unworldly, living in the 50's, wasnt going to be dictated to by anyone, "g'head, Fire Me" type dealeo & that was that. You wanna Crucify the guy for having opinions that you'll find in every small town from Tuymazy to Tillsonburg, from Ostersund to Oshkosh of the same generation's? Clear the planet of tree's if thats what you have in mind. These opinions exist & to deny them, no. No chance. The xenophobia met head on with condemnation, and better it be out in the open, discussed, rather than be left to simmer, odiously spread in secret. Corrected. Don Cherry today is not the Don Cherry of 1944, 54, 64, 74 or 1980 or 1985, 1990... he's smartened up. With age, wisdom.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Re Don Cherry and the above. As a teammate, regardless of your background you would be certain he would have your back all the time.

 

[Doctor No]

Interesting diachotomy. So it is possible to follow a specific team without know how the rest of the league is doing, how your team is positioned in the standings,the quality of the opposition, etc?

Yes. Sorry I wasn't clear.

 

[Staniowski]

Honestly, I don't find it outrageous if someone ranks Denis Potvin ahead of Raymond Bourque.

I remember starting around the mid-80s there was a lot of comparisons of Bourque to Potvin. Of course this was on an all-time basis, as Potvin was really past his best years by 1985. (You really had to see Potvin in the second half of the '70s to see him at his absolute best).

I really liked Bourque at that time. He seemed to have the puck on his stick for half the game. He just looked really good, and dominated the play much of the time.

In comparison to Potvin, though, there was a viewpoint that Bourque never quite reached the level of Potvin at his best, was not quite as individually creative, not quite as mean, not quite as impactful, as Potvin was.

But Bourque just kept going and going, playing at a very high level, racking up 1st and 2nd team all-star nods year after year for a very long time. I think this ultimately won most people over.

 

[quoipourquoi]

The biggest reason I can't put Messier above Bourque is post season all stars:

1st team:

Bourque: 13
Messier: 4

2nd team:

Bourque: 6
Messier: 1

Kind of an unfair comparison. Despite winning two Hart Trophies (1990, 1992) and being a runner-up for a 3rd (1996) as a Center, Mark Messier still has more All-Star selections as a Left Wing than he does as a Center, because it's really, really difficult to get All-Star selections at Center. Had Messier stayed a Left Wing, he's probably retiring with a comparable amount to Ray Bourque.

Consider this: how many times did you feel at least four of Bourque's competitors for an All-Star selection in a given season were better than Mark Messier? He may not necessarily be better than Mario Lemieux and Eric Lindros in 1995-96, but he's as good or better than Bourque's All-Star competition.